4. The applicants were born in 1955 and 1931 respectively, and live in Prešov.
5. On 28 May 1992 the applicants requested the Prague Regional Commercial Court (krajský obchodní soud) to order a private company to cease using their patent illegally, and to pay them compensation for it. On 15 June 1992 the court received their action.
6.  On 23 March 1994 the applicants were invited to pay the court fees.
7.  On 5 October and 16 November 1994 and 24 January 1995, the court held hearings.
8.  In the meantime, between 3 August and 10 November 1994, the parties to the proceedings, upon the court's request of 11 July 1994, had submitted their respective observations and comments concerning the merits of the case.
9.  On 30 January 1995 the court received the applicants' patent certificate (patentová listina), issued by the Office of Industrial Intellectual Property (Úřad průmyslového vlastnictví) (hereinafter the “OIP”) on 9 January 1995.
10.  On 10 June and 9 October 1996 respectively, the applicants, upon the court's requests of 16 May and 1 October 1996, specified the product allegedly violating their patent. The specifications were received by the court on 14 June and 14 October 1996 respectively.
11.  On 15 October 1996 the court received the OIP's information that, on 11 November 1995, the patent in question had been partly quashed and that, on 15 December 1995, new proceedings before the OIP concerning the patent had commenced.
12.  On 22 October 1996 the court requested the defendant to submit documentation related to its product, specified by the applicants on 14 October 1996.
13.  On 18 December 1996 the applicants sent to the court a copy of the OIP's decision of 12 December 1996, confirming that the product manufactured by the defendant fell within the ambit of the applicants' patent.
14.  On 31 March 1998 the applicants sent to the court the OIP's decision and a decision of the OIP's President of 17 March 1998, dismissing the defendant's appeal against the OIP's decision of 12 December 1996.
15.  On 14 October 1999 the court adjourned the hearing scheduled for 19 November to 9 December 1999 due to the judge's illness.
16.  On 18 November 1999 the applicants specified their claim. On 25 November 1999 the court received the specifications.
17.  On 9 December 1999 the court held a hearing, at which the applicants again modified their action. The court requested them to specify the facts and to supplement their request for modification of the action of 18 November 1999. On 20 December 1999 the applicants specified their action.
18.  On 25 September 2000 the court fixed a hearing for 27 November 2000, at which it partly accepted the applicants' modification of their action.
19.  On 24 November 2000 the applicants specified their claim for damages.
20.  On 27 November 2000 the court held a hearing, at which the applicants again requested modification of their action, which the court granted.
21.  On 26 February 2001 the court held a hearing, at which it stayed the proceedings pending the
 outcome of proceedings before the OIP concerning the defendant's request to annul the patent.
22.  On 28 February and 28 August 2001 respectively, the court requested the OIP to inform it about the progress of the proceedings, which the latter did on 4 September 2001. On 10 January 2002 the court received the decision of the OIP's President of 9 January 2002, dismissing the defendant's appeal of 25 June 2001, against which the defendant had appealed to the High Court (Vrchní soud).
23.  On 17 April 2002 the court stayed the proceedings pending the High Court's decision. Upon the applicants' appeal of 24 May 2002, supplemented on 29 May 2002, and after the case file had been submitted to the High Court on 6 June 2002, the latter modified the court's decision on 8 August 2002 so that the proceedings could be continued. On 13 August 2002 the case file was remitted to the Municipal Court.
24.  On 15 November 2002, after having held a hearing on 6 November 2002, the Municipal Court partly granted the applicants' action.
25.  On 2 October 2003 and 31 March 2004 respectively, the High Court and Supreme Court (Nejvyšší soud) upheld the judgment.